Architecture and Destruction

by Stefan Georgievski

Architecture, by nature, is an act of politic. From its design stage, architects primarily are solving problems with functional and formal aspects of the building, negotiating within themselves, planning carefully step-by-step, sometimes even making revolutions or terror. The new edifice, on an empty plot in the city, is bringing changes to the landscape not only visually, but socially. Between its users and neighbors new social relationships emerge, shaping a new realm. It changes the conditions of living and builds the environment where we live in.

A project for a building, once completed, can and will change the society that builds it. A building, act of architecture, could directly catalyze a transformation of social, economic and political fabric. The emerging new architecture in the world brings hope and faith of a better world. The spectator admires the courage and boldness of an architectural sign, believing that everything is possible. All problems are solvable. With skillful use of technology and space, architects of today, more than ever, can shape and create a world without scarcity and fear. Brighter future. We can build the perpetuum mobile, the tower of Babel, produce abundance of resources and improve the human life on global scales. We can shape a better world.

So, the role of the architect is instrumental, not expressive. Real architecture is a tool, sign and manifesto, that motivates to think, to do, to become, to know, and also to pass away, to inspire, be an echo and vestige, new soil for other acts and future to shape. Architecture shouldn’t be something that follows up the event but be a leader of events. It can become initiator and an active participant of a massive change of the society. Expressive architecture is a product of architect – conformist. This is not creation it’s a mere execution of the will of investors, embracing the current regressive spatial and social order. The architect is becoming a pyramid builder, a slave. “The practice of architecture today is protected from confrontation with changing political conditions in the world within a hermetically sealed capsule of professionalism, which ostensibly exists to protect its high standards from the corrupting influence of political expediency and merely topical concerns.” (Woods, 1995) Albert Speer's buildings were like Adolf Hitler's speeches: huge, hammeringly repetitious, banal but filled with machine-like-force. Language of power; big buildings that intimidate the people. The grandiosity of his architectural fantasy belongs to a whole tradition of visionary architecture, which encompasses idealist architects like the 18th century Frenchmen Boullée and Ledoux, but larger. In fact, a debased 18th century neoclassicism has long been the universal language of political power from Leningrad to Paris—and even Washington. By wedding neoclassicism to Hitler’s Kampf, Speer could have killed the style. But the style emerges not only in dictatorships, but in corrupt societies like Macedonia and others (even democratic) that glorify the power of the government.

“People shouldn’t be afraid of the government. Government should be afraid of the people!” (V)

Change within the society doesn’t necessarily come by building, but by destroying the monuments corrupt architects create. The fall of Berlin Wall meant liberation and gave hope for new era of cooperation. It restored the faith in people that better days are coming. V with a Guy Fawkes mask destroyed Houses of Parliament in one big firework as a symbol of change and an end of a corrupted regime. Demolishing architecture of terror gives me hope for freedom. Flatten the walls. Create freescapes.

Reference:
Woods, Lebbeus “Anarchitecture: Architecture is a Political Act”, 1995
V for Vendetta (the movie), 2005
The Zeitgeist Movement

"Ich bin ein Berliner" in Rennes

Exibition on 20 years of the fall of the Berlin Wall
by Ivana Velkovska

On June 26, 1963 , the American president John F. Kennedy, held a speech in Berlin, supporting West Germany, after the Communist State of East Germany build up the Berlin Wall, which separated the East from the West.

All free men, wherever they may live, are citizens of Berlin, and, therefore, as a free man, I take pride in the words 'Ich bin ein Berliner!'

Students of last year in graphic design at Lisaa ( College of Applied Arts) in Rennes, France, were given a task to create posters on Europe, seen throughout its history, sociology, economy, geography and culture...

The goal was to express different visions and ideas of young people, who have lived in a "free" Europe without a Wall separating the Est from the West. The quotation "Ich bin ein Berliner" was here represented as a part of European consciousness for freedom, tolerence and diversity. Later, the Euporean motto will be : "Unity in diversity".

The only remark is that in general, there was very little critics, or personal point of view on the given subject. The exibition remains a polite and at the moments, sterile image of Europe. The most of the posters waer only just beautiful visuals projecting optimism and harmony in the "Unity"...

Despite many negative elements still present in Europe, the students gave a very optimistic vision of what Europe represents today. Maybe just too much optimistic. The exibition took place in the Franco-American Institut in Rennes, from 17 to 31 March.

Reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ich_bin_ein_Berliner

Architectural Trends in Macedonia

by Nora Arsovska

The post earthquake reconstruction of Skopje is the golden (only) period of Macedonian architecture and urbanism, when it follows the global trends and sets certain contemporary designing tools and directions on the domestic scene. This is the period when great number of important urban and architectural plans had been completed or partially realized and had become representatives of their time. Most of the realized plans had been made in accordance with the principals of the Modernism. Many dwelling parts in the town of Skopje have the contemporary urban concept and are realized with modern analytic and synthetic methodology.
During the second half of the 90’s, XX century, parallel with the independence of Macedonia as a republic, a tendency of gradual degradation can be noticed in the architectural and urban development. The descending trend at first was explicitly presented in the single family dwelling design, when the investor took the role of the architect. Eclecticism and kitsch progressed rapidly fast, and for short time the neo-styles reached their higher level in Macedonia. Neo-classical, neo-antique and many other neo styles become the favorite architectural solution for the single family houses. Soon the neo-styles transferred from individual housing to the public buildings in the central urban tissue. The transfer of eclecticism made from individual to public level concerned certain number of professionals that quietly disagreed with this trend.
The eclectic urban esthetic escalated and reached its pick, when the government became investor of public buildings and monuments according individual taste. The bizarreness of shaping the city culminated when several buildings with hybrid appearance were planned to be or are positioned on locations that are not planed as building parcels in the Master Plan for the City Center, without initiating public debate.
In general, two opposite tendencies can be distinguished in the latest public urban activities in Macedonia. The first one is inclined towards resurrecting the pre earthquake neo-classical buildings so called ghosts, realizing neo-antique and other public building with eclectic styles. The numerous winner projects on the international competition announced by the government certify this tendency. On the other hand there is certain number of competition winner projects that with their function and appearing are bringing back the faith in the urban aesthetic.
Here follows an illustration of the opposite tendencies through a number of examples, some realized and some waiting (or not) to be realized:
The Monumental Home of Mother Teresa is the strangest surreal experience one could have. This “monument”, chosen as a winner on a second competition call under curious circumstances provoked controversial public reactions. In general, the building should represent the traditional Macedonian house that was the unrealized dream of Mother Teresa. The quazi-monument is out of time and fashion placed on non existing building area on the most attractive walking street in Skopje in front of the modernistic concert hall of the Army of Macedonia.

Another example of the eclectic tendency is the plan for the building of the Constitutional Court/Archeological Museum/Archive that is planned to (or not) be situated on the left bank of the river Vardar. This monument is mimicry of antique temple, situated in a non-suiting contemporary surrounding.

The winning project for the competition for architectural design of a new building for the theater Center in Skopje is more progressive and contemporary solution that follows the world trends. According the authors the geometry of the auditorium is derived from the classical European theater. The appearance of the theater, the skin of the building that is a kind of city curtain is very similar to the one of the Dallas Center for performing arts.

Dallas Center for performing arts

The project for the Macedonian Philharmony should be situated near the Neo-antique temple of the Constitutional Court/Archeological Museum/Archive on the left key of the river. This is a complex building with contemporary look , rounded shape that obviously fits more in the surrounding than the building of the Constitutional Court/Archeological Museum/Archive.

Reference:
The Monumental Home of Mother Teresa
http://www.a1.com.mk/vesti/default.aspx?VestID=103721
The Constitutional Court/Arcehological Museum/Archive of RM http://www.utrinski.com.mk/?ItemID=E7F273AA5FEB0F4AB2EE8092AEE7C837
Theater Center
http://www.novamakedonija.com.mk/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabindex=0&tabid=2&fCat=1&top=1&EditionID=354&ArticleID=21450
Dallas Center for performing arts
http://www.designboom.com/weblog/cat/9/view/5657/rex-architects-dallas-center-for-the-performing-arts-dee-and-charles-wyly-theater.html
Macedonian Philharmony
http://www.a1.com.mk/vesti/default.aspx?VestID=82863

New Planning tools for shaping cityscapes in the American Cities

by Biljana Spirkoska

The American city had changed markedly during the first eight decades of the century. The man-made environment experienced a transformation on a scale not seen since the Renaissance.

At the turn of the century, the downtown had been the center of urban transportation, business, industry, amusement, and government. City Hall, soaring skyscrapers, department stores, impressive theatres, mammoth hotels, spacious rail terminals, and a dense knot of streetcar lines- all were part of the downtown scene. The downtown was truly the business hearth of the metropolis, the center of city government, the place where public policy was made, and also it was the transportation hub, where people from all sections of the metropolis crossed paths. The downtown was a shared experience, holding together the varied fragments of the metropolis.

Over the century, the role of the downtown was narrowing. By the 1980s, the American city no longer had a single dominant nucleus. Instead, retailing was increasingly dispersed, industry was spread out along the superhighways and rail lines, and government authority was distributed among the multitude of municipalities that made up the metropolitan area. There was no longer one mayor and city council which had to mediate among the divergent social, economic, and ethnic interests within the city, but each suburban municipality had jurisdiction over a small segment of the whole. Beside the appearance of the office parks, the central-city downtown remained the dominant hub of finance and business services. The diversity of the early-twentieth-century downtown was replaced with rows of towers and office workers. There was no longer any one dominant economic, intellectual, or cultural center to the metropolis. Instead there were many. The city had fragmented, breaking into its component parts.

In other words, the twentieth century has seen a radical transformation in American cities. Paradoxically, this transformation has stimulated an interest in the older forms of cities and increased peoples’ respect for the planning tradition that created them. For example, the single-family suburban tract development after World War II has led to a new understanding of older residential areas where a pedestrian scale and a dense, complex mixture of housing types and other land uses seemed to lead to better opportunities for community. The revolutionary decentralization in retailing and the rise of "Mallopolis" on every major highway has made the surviving older Main Streets a focus for civic pride and redevelopment. This dispersal has made understandable the special value of the central regional downtowns, with their irreplaceable heritage of diversity, public space, historic structures, and regional identity.

Consequently, many urbanists have started to look at ways of retaining or re-creating the qualities that comprise livable, memorable, and diverse community life. They began to develop new tools to address the issues of character and quality. The most influential among these new tools for shaping cityscapes are Traditional neighborhood development ordinance, Mixed- use Districts, and Form- based codes.

Traditional Neighborhood Development Ordinance (TND Ordinance): Traditional Neighborhood Development is a planning concept that is based on traditional small town and city neighborhood development principles. Traditional Neighborhood Development basically means: compact, mixed use neighborhood where residential, commercial and civic buildings are within close proximity to each other.
Traditional Neighborhood Development does not stand for one-solution-fits-all policy. Contrary, it is based on analyze of the development patterns and designs of the past to provide a context for the specific standards contained in the ordinance. Anyways, as cities and villages modify the model ordinance to meet the unique circumstances found within their communities, the ordinances developed should seek to achieve several basic principles: compact development, mixed use, multiple modes of transportation and response to cultural and environmental context.

Mixed- use Districts: Mixed- use districts is another new zoning tool developed to mitigate the strict separation of uses. Mixing use is recognized to have the potential to increase social interaction and enrich civic life, to bring important benefits in efficiency (by optimizing the use of infrastructure), equity (by providing a variety of housing options and better access to services for different income groups), and sustainability (by reducing the consumption of land and the need for cars). In short, Mixed-use development introduces new development patterns that are civic-oriented, pedestrian-friendly, economically vibrant, environmentally sustainable, and evoke a unique sense of place.

Form- based codes: Form-based development codes are a tool for regulating development to achieve a specific urban form. They focus primarily on the public realm and the type of urban form necessary to create welcoming public spaces and walkable neighborhoods.
The most popular form-based code is the SmartCode. The SmartCode moves beyond regulating only the form of a specific piece of land and instead further regulates how a singular form fits into the larger context of the region.

However, despite the mounting evidence that standard zoning rooted in the 1916 New York City zoning ordinance that categorized land uses, created districts appropriate for those categorized uses has many costs, the system remains the unspoken assumption, and the default planning system. In addition, none of these new codes is adopted as a standalone regulatory ordinance. The new codes usually end up incorporated into a local government’s development regulation as: Optional (parallel) codes, Floating-zone codes, and only rarely as Mandatory codes, making the new code a seamless part of, or a complete replacement for the existing zoning ordinance.

The importance of Place

by Stefan Lazarevski


The emergence of the so called Age of Mass intelligence, sponsored by the rise of Internet, Social Networking and Reality TV, has exposed an ongoing debate, within the sociologists, economists and urbanists, of whether place really matters. In a world where modern economy is powered not by labor and production, but by knowledge and communication, the question of importance of place is very liable.
In 2005, the New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman published a book (Friedman, 2005), where he outlined a picture of the global economical shifts. He announced: “The World is flat!” What he referred to was the global shift of the economies from local to global scale, resulting in increasing trend of the outsourcing, off shoring, supply chaining and in-sourcing; this proved that the creative class has established networks which are not place based anymore.
On the other hand, the explosive growth of cities and urban areas worldwide, the rise of the creative centers, and concentration of economic and cultural activities has exposed the clustering force as a strong factor that keeps the value of the location very high. The World’s economical landscape according to Florida (2008) is anything but flat; on contrary it is a spiky World that we live in, today!

The discussion of whether place really matters is especially fierce within the contemporary knowledge-economy based societies. In such a society, the knowledge is the driving force for overall development; there, the economical and political evolution, the social relations and habits of the citizens as well as, the urban growth and the physical form of the city are just a reflection of the level of accumulated knowledge. To understand how these cities work, we must first define and understand what knowledge economy and knowledge – based societies are?
Etymologically, the phrase Knowledge Economy was introduced by Peter Drucker in his book “The Age of Discontinuity” (1968). In the late 60s of the XX century, speaking about the brain drainage in economically inferior countries, Drucker identifies the knowledge as the key factor in future economical development of the western civilization. “For the intellectuals knowledge is what is in a book. But as long as it is in the book it is information if not “mere data”. Only when man applies the information to doing something does it become knowledge.” (Drucker, 1968) Therefore the emergence of Knowledge Economy, according to Drucker, is not only a product of intellectual activities, as it is normally conceived, but rather part of “history of technology” which recounts how man puts tools to work. Today, the economies must be knowledge based in order to perform, to grow and to compete. The question remains what is the basic economic, social and political unit that stages such progress.

sketch of the core-principles of the Saraswati knowledge-economy based city in India, Calthorpe Associates, 2008

The artificial political boundaries of the nation states cannot be taken as the framework for analyses of the knowledge-economy based societies. The cities on the other hand, being endowed with knowledge infrastructure, human capital, widely spread communication, social and financial networks and ultimately being decision making centers, are the actual focal point of knowledge economy in many respects. Over the history, the most serious force to challenge the endurance of the cities was the Technological Progress. Every technological invention, throughout the history was a promise to a boundless world. The invention of telephone, car, air plane even the World Wide Web, were step forward in freeing people from geography. But, as compelling as it sounds, this notion repeatedly proved its self wrong. The cities kept the high concentration of the main economic factors: talent, innovation and creativity or what Florida refers to as the “clustering force” (2008). In the knowledge economy, talented people tend to go where other talented people are, because one of the drivers of innovation is the exchange of implicit knowledge among actors. Cities can be good environments for this type of exchange, which ultimately sponsors the competitive and creative edge of the society. Face to face contacts also enhance the mutual trust which only proves that proximity is vital in terms of preserving already established networks or conceiving new ones. Finally, cities, with their urban diversity, are the promoters of creativity. Namely, places which are able to attract diverse groups of people by ethnicity, nationality, gender and sexual orientation, argues Florida (2000), are an environment that is easy to plug into; such places can be said to have low entry barriers for talent. Therefore these places - cities are fertile ground for establishing and maintaining the knowledge economy and ultimately they are our “playground”.

This is why the place and the city, as most conflictual place of them all, is and will be very important and immanent to our self-identification.


reference:
― Drucker, Peter, 1968, The Age of Discontinuity, Chapter 12, Harper & Row, New York
― Florida, Richard, 2000, The Economic Geography of Talent, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh
― Florida, Richard, 2008, Who’s Your City, Basic Books, New York
― Friedman, Thomas, 2005, The World is Flat, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York